10 ms·

Diesel shop fined $10M for making and selling Emissions Defeat Devices

75 points by botanical 2y ago

2four2 2y ago
I'm regularly involved in the car community, and this is far more common than is often thought. I've met dozens of people who have illegally modified their diesels, and that's in California. There's plenty more for the EPA to crack down on.
- Washuu 2y ago
  Car modders toss catalytic converters all the time too in states without emissions enforcement. It's just not a problem that is handled. At one point I was working on a startup idea that would produce a piece of electronics for helping with drive train swaps. However, I realized that it would make it very easy to ignore all emission and safety requirements despite my efforts to prevent that. So I dropped the entire idea and moved on with my life. I don't want to unintentionally help other people make the planet worse.(But I also wanted people to reuse/recycle car parts more effectively. Oh well.)
- car 2y ago
  What kind of modifications are these? EGR and DPF deletes? That would surely be caught during California Diesel smog testing.
avidiax 2y ago
I want them to go after muffler shops for noise pollution. Most states have laws that you can't modify an exhaust to be louder than the stock exhaust. Yet in every urban area you can hear some percentage of drivers that modify their cars to be 10x louder than everyone else, often with "crackle and pop" tunes to intentionally defeat emissions controls to leave unburnt gasoline to detonate in the exhaust every time they lift off the gas.
- rob74 2y ago
  Don't forget motorcycles!
  - grujicd 2y ago
    To play the devil's advocate. Not all motorcycle noise is bad. As a car driver, I'm sometimes grateful that I hear bikes before I can see them, they can very easily hide in a blind spot. The way they move through the traffic is in may cases illegal, but I'm not a law enforcement. They drive the way they drive, I can't change that. My primary concern is to not hit them, and some noise on their part helps in that.
    - USiBqidmOOkAqRb 2y ago
      I would like to see this myth tested. From my experience even reasonably priced cars have decent enough noise insulation. Exhaust pipes face back. Inverse square law means the radio has to do very little work to be louder. All this added up you'll only hear the noise terrorist as they're lane splitting next to you.
- HPsquared 2y ago
  A lot of manufacturers put in "crackle and pop" as well, on the more sporty models. I guess the catalytic converters etc must be built to handle it, in that case.
  - consp 2y ago
    It's just a pressure difference, no need for explosions. You can create it with a lean mode as well it's less effective but doesn't kill the muffler and catalytic converter. It's still highly annoying though. Only effective way to prevent it is a once off "fix it or it get's crushed" notice. And crush it the second time to a tiny tin box.
    - HPsquared 2y ago
      Thinking more I guess the stock ones are more a kind of "burble on overrun" and maybe a mild anti-lag on shifting (especially on dual clutch models).. thinking of BMW here.
teruakohatu 2y ago
What are these defect devices trying to achieve? More engine power at the expense or pollution and worse fuel efficiency?
- kasabali 2y ago
  > worse fuel efficiency no, it's the opposite. Emission controls result in worse fuel efficiency.
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    Yeah your car might get 210 HP rather than 212. It's not the 70s anymore.
    - pbmonster 2y ago
      It's a little worse than that. After Dieselgate, Volkswagen brought their diesels into compliance by software patch. People did dyno runs of all VWs before and after the patch, and in many cases (e.g. the 180HP Passat) got something like 10% less horsepower and drastically worse torque curves (max torque at 1900 rpm instead of at 1500 rpm) after the patch. Fuel economy also went down by around 10% because of the patch. Makes sense from a thermodynamic perspective: your engine runs with more power/torque and more efficient if you run it hotter. But running a diesel hotter makes much more NOx.
      - USiBqidmOOkAqRb 2y ago
        It truly boggles the mind how quick people are to justify causing birth defects just so they could satisfy their sporty launch fetish.
    - mdp2021 2y ago
      Some parts of the emissions control systems (I was informed by competent technicians, but not yet adequately "educated") work through burning extra gasoline and fuel - they are active, they use energy. The extra intake may seem pretty dramatic - though of course full data for comparison should be in order... It should be possible to compare euro-4 vs euro-5 model consumption through spritmonitor.de (through selecting by year) - I have no time right now but may do it later, and possibly report.
RedShift1 2y ago
What do these "emissions defeat" devices do? Are they to make the engine produce more power, or to be able to pass emissions testing (like how VW try to make their cars seem less poluting by detecting whether or not the engine was under test and altering engine behavior)?
- scotty79 2y ago
  Maybe it has something to do with "rolling coal"? Stock engine shouldn't be able to do that I think.
- kedikedi 2y ago
  They might turn off/block egr which reintroduces exhaust gasses to intake to reduce combustion temperature. The upside of this system is that it reduces NOx emissions, the downside is that you’re bringing a lot of soot inside the engine. They are abrasive. Combine egr with pcv, which directs positive crankcase pressure into the intake, you get an oily sooty mixture caking inside the intake. Combine this with swirl flaps, which create a small tornado at lower engine speeds for better combustion, you get caking on the flaps and your intake becomes halfway clogged. These are my annoyances. But to be honest, it didn’t require cleaning even after 250.000 kilometers of driving. I saw the caking while doing some other work, but the engine was running fine But there’s also the dpf, and the adblue stuff. Dpf is an issue only if you use wrong kind of oil and clog it. I’m assuming people remove the dpf to run coal, as it will get clogged extremely fast if you detune your engine. It might also be an annoyance if you want to mod the engine, but not sure on that front. And adblue is yet another thing to fill every now and then. No experience with that, but I assume it might annoy some.
  - consp 2y ago
    When you start "rolling coal" all the "gains" by removing the EGR and PCV will be negated since you will be lining your valves with tar and ruining the oil.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
MarkMarine 2y ago
A quick primer on what diesel shops are selling with these: There are 3 main methods of emissions controls on modern diesels - EGR (Exhaust Gas Return) which takes already burned (hot) exhaust and reinjects it into the intake tract. This causes soot and cokes the intake valves, grid heater, etc. - DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) which collects soot until it’s restricted, then burns fuel in the exhaust to cook the soot into ash. - Catalytic converters & SCR (selective catalytic conversion) which injects corrosive DEF (Diesel Exhaust Fluid/ cow piss) into the exhaust. If you remove these systems from your vehicle, it won’t run, because the OEMs engine controls say if the DEF tank is empty or it’s throwing codes for EGR or DPF, it won’t get full power. These shops sell a way to get around that, so you can take all these systems off your engine that kill longevity and efficiency, while not caring about the soot and NOx you’re emitting. A pre-emissions diesel will easily go for 300-400k miles without a rebuild, the modern ones break in really really expensive ways right about the time your warranty ends (60k) I drive a modern diesel, I race motorcycles and I’ve got a heavy rig to tow to the track, and I’ve left my emissions in place. I don’t love the trade off, it does seem like the manufacturers took the easy way out and tuned their components for timed obsolescence just like the incandescent lightbulb. What these shops are doing is filling a request from owners in states that don’t emissions control these engines, but I guess federally they are breaking the law. Seems grey to me. The manufacturers are only selling the emissions controlled engines to comply with CA and MA and others, while the middle of the country doesn’t control these things.
- omgwtfbyobbq 2y ago
  Tampering/defeating emissions systems isn't a grey area. Anyone can likely get away with it in the same way they can get away with dumping all kinds of pollutants into the air/water/soil. The federal government also regulates nox, ppm, etc... https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php CARB has more stringent regulations, but I believe most of the companies selling defeat devices are removing the emissions components, not tuning a truck that complies with 2024 CARB standards to instead comply with 2024 federal standards. I think anything built before 1970, or whatever the specific year is, can be legally modified however you want. It's just not legal to take something newer and remove some/all the emissions equipment
thro2309 2y ago
[dead]
kavalg 2y ago
Made $33M in revenue and was fined $10M. I highly doubt the company worked at 30% margin, so they must still be profitable after paying the fine.
frank_bb 2y ago
[dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sagebird 2y ago
Is a fine not another way of saying - “no fair!- we want our cut!”
josefritzishere 2y ago
They made 33M and were fined 9M? Roughly a net profit of 24 Million? Yes I'm sure they totally learned their lesson and would never make tens of millions in defiance of lax enforcement again.

75 points by botanical 2y ago

I'm regularly involved in the car community, and this is far more common than is often thought. I've met dozens of people who have illegally modified their diesels, and that's in California. There's plenty more for the EPA to crack down on.

Washuu 2y ago
Car modders toss catalytic converters all the time too in states without emissions enforcement. It's just not a problem that is handled. At one point I was working on a startup idea that would produce a piece of electronics for helping with drive train swaps. However, I realized that it would make it very easy to ignore all emission and safety requirements despite my efforts to prevent that. So I dropped the entire idea and moved on with my life. I don't want to unintentionally help other people make the planet worse.(But I also wanted people to reuse/recycle car parts more effectively. Oh well.)
car 2y ago
What kind of modifications are these? EGR and DPF deletes? That would surely be caught during California Diesel smog testing.

avidiax 2y ago

I want them to go after muffler shops for noise pollution. Most states have laws that you can't modify an exhaust to be louder than the stock exhaust. Yet in every urban area you can hear some percentage of drivers that modify their cars to be 10x louder than everyone else, often with "crackle and pop" tunes to intentionally defeat emissions controls to leave unburnt gasoline to detonate in the exhaust every time they lift off the gas.

rob74 2y ago
Don't forget motorcycles!
- grujicd 2y ago
  To play the devil's advocate. Not all motorcycle noise is bad. As a car driver, I'm sometimes grateful that I hear bikes before I can see them, they can very easily hide in a blind spot. The way they move through the traffic is in may cases illegal, but I'm not a law enforcement. They drive the way they drive, I can't change that. My primary concern is to not hit them, and some noise on their part helps in that.
  - USiBqidmOOkAqRb 2y ago
    I would like to see this myth tested. From my experience even reasonably priced cars have decent enough noise insulation. Exhaust pipes face back. Inverse square law means the radio has to do very little work to be louder. All this added up you'll only hear the noise terrorist as they're lane splitting next to you.
HPsquared 2y ago
A lot of manufacturers put in "crackle and pop" as well, on the more sporty models. I guess the catalytic converters etc must be built to handle it, in that case.
- consp 2y ago
  It's just a pressure difference, no need for explosions. You can create it with a lean mode as well it's less effective but doesn't kill the muffler and catalytic converter. It's still highly annoying though. Only effective way to prevent it is a once off "fix it or it get's crushed" notice. And crush it the second time to a tiny tin box.
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    Thinking more I guess the stock ones are more a kind of "burble on overrun" and maybe a mild anti-lag on shifting (especially on dual clutch models).. thinking of BMW here.

teruakohatu 2y ago

What are these defect devices trying to achieve? More engine power at the expense or pollution and worse fuel efficiency?

kasabali 2y ago
> worse fuel efficiency no, it's the opposite. Emission controls result in worse fuel efficiency.
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  Yeah your car might get 210 HP rather than 212. It's not the 70s anymore.
  - pbmonster 2y ago
    It's a little worse than that. After Dieselgate, Volkswagen brought their diesels into compliance by software patch. People did dyno runs of all VWs before and after the patch, and in many cases (e.g. the 180HP Passat) got something like 10% less horsepower and drastically worse torque curves (max torque at 1900 rpm instead of at 1500 rpm) after the patch. Fuel economy also went down by around 10% because of the patch. Makes sense from a thermodynamic perspective: your engine runs with more power/torque and more efficient if you run it hotter. But running a diesel hotter makes much more NOx.
    - USiBqidmOOkAqRb 2y ago
      It truly boggles the mind how quick people are to justify causing birth defects just so they could satisfy their sporty launch fetish.
  - mdp2021 2y ago
    Some parts of the emissions control systems (I was informed by competent technicians, but not yet adequately "educated") work through burning extra gasoline and fuel - they are active, they use energy. The extra intake may seem pretty dramatic - though of course full data for comparison should be in order... It should be possible to compare euro-4 vs euro-5 model consumption through spritmonitor.de (through selecting by year) - I have no time right now but may do it later, and possibly report.

RedShift1 2y ago

What do these "emissions defeat" devices do? Are they to make the engine produce more power, or to be able to pass emissions testing (like how VW try to make their cars seem less poluting by detecting whether or not the engine was under test and altering engine behavior)?

scotty79 2y ago
Maybe it has something to do with "rolling coal"? Stock engine shouldn't be able to do that I think.
kedikedi 2y ago
They might turn off/block egr which reintroduces exhaust gasses to intake to reduce combustion temperature. The upside of this system is that it reduces NOx emissions, the downside is that you’re bringing a lot of soot inside the engine. They are abrasive. Combine egr with pcv, which directs positive crankcase pressure into the intake, you get an oily sooty mixture caking inside the intake. Combine this with swirl flaps, which create a small tornado at lower engine speeds for better combustion, you get caking on the flaps and your intake becomes halfway clogged. These are my annoyances. But to be honest, it didn’t require cleaning even after 250.000 kilometers of driving. I saw the caking while doing some other work, but the engine was running fine But there’s also the dpf, and the adblue stuff. Dpf is an issue only if you use wrong kind of oil and clog it. I’m assuming people remove the dpf to run coal, as it will get clogged extremely fast if you detune your engine. It might also be an annoyance if you want to mod the engine, but not sure on that front. And adblue is yet another thing to fill every now and then. No experience with that, but I assume it might annoy some.
- consp 2y ago
  When you start "rolling coal" all the "gains" by removing the EGR and PCV will be negated since you will be lining your valves with tar and ruining the oil.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

MarkMarine 2y ago

A quick primer on what diesel shops are selling with these: There are 3 main methods of emissions controls on modern diesels - EGR (Exhaust Gas Return) which takes already burned (hot) exhaust and reinjects it into the intake tract. This causes soot and cokes the intake valves, grid heater, etc. - DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) which collects soot until it’s restricted, then burns fuel in the exhaust to cook the soot into ash. - Catalytic converters & SCR (selective catalytic conversion) which injects corrosive DEF (Diesel Exhaust Fluid/ cow piss) into the exhaust. If you remove these systems from your vehicle, it won’t run, because the OEMs engine controls say if the DEF tank is empty or it’s throwing codes for EGR or DPF, it won’t get full power. These shops sell a way to get around that, so you can take all these systems off your engine that kill longevity and efficiency, while not caring about the soot and NOx you’re emitting. A pre-emissions diesel will easily go for 300-400k miles without a rebuild, the modern ones break in really really expensive ways right about the time your warranty ends (60k) I drive a modern diesel, I race motorcycles and I’ve got a heavy rig to tow to the track, and I’ve left my emissions in place. I don’t love the trade off, it does seem like the manufacturers took the easy way out and tuned their components for timed obsolescence just like the incandescent lightbulb. What these shops are doing is filling a request from owners in states that don’t emissions control these engines, but I guess federally they are breaking the law. Seems grey to me. The manufacturers are only selling the emissions controlled engines to comply with CA and MA and others, while the middle of the country doesn’t control these things.

omgwtfbyobbq 2y ago
Tampering/defeating emissions systems isn't a grey area. Anyone can likely get away with it in the same way they can get away with dumping all kinds of pollutants into the air/water/soil. The federal government also regulates nox, ppm, etc... https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php CARB has more stringent regulations, but I believe most of the companies selling defeat devices are removing the emissions components, not tuning a truck that complies with 2024 CARB standards to instead comply with 2024 federal standards. I think anything built before 1970, or whatever the specific year is, can be legally modified however you want. It's just not legal to take something newer and remove some/all the emissions equipment

thro2309 2y ago

[dead]

kavalg 2y ago

Made $33M in revenue and was fined $10M. I highly doubt the company worked at 30% margin, so they must still be profitable after paying the fine.

frank_bb 2y ago

[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

sagebird 2y ago

Is a fine not another way of saying - “no fair!- we want our cut!”

josefritzishere 2y ago

They made 33M and were fined 9M? Roughly a net profit of 24 Million? Yes I'm sure they totally learned their lesson and would never make tens of millions in defiance of lax enforcement again.